R E V I E W S

On the whole, Henry Nash Smith's Virgin Land (1950) received highly complimentary
reviews. More than a dozen journals critiqued the book and nearly every
reviewer recognized its historical or literary significance.
Richard Hofstadter, writing for the American
Quarterly, claimed that "there is hardly a phase of American thought about
America that it does not directly or tangentially illuminate."

Journals that published reviews of Virgin Land
are listed below and are grouped in terms of disciplinary focus.
It is interesting to note that, of the minor criticisms Henry
Nash Smith received, historical journals invoked the majority of
them. The Historian, for example, cited a handful of
factual errors, while The Journal of Southern History
chides Smith for neglecting to comment on the "gold rushes,
cattle industry, modern reclamation, vacation areas, Indian life,
or industrial expansion on the Pacific Coast." The American
Historical Review criticized Smith for using abstract
literary terms such as "symbol" and "myth," and hoped that "use
of these terms will not prove catching."